Steve'sDigicams

cybrosh · Oct 21, 2005, 8:01 PM

Let's do it differently.

What stills camera would you recommend that also has great video capabilities?

Cheers!

Rambler358 · Oct 23, 2005, 10:00 PM

You might want to define what you mean by "great video capabilities", as quite a few digital cameras come with the ability to shoot video at 640x480 at 30fps. Did you need more than that? If so, the choices narrow down considerably. But if your first direction is video and you need to take the occassional still, then you may want to look at digital video cams instead.

VAtechtigger · Oct 24, 2005, 9:53 AM

The canon S2 has about the best video capability of any Still camera. 640x480 at 30fps, full optical zoom during movie, and you can snap pics as well during video record at full resolution, stereo sound. Nobody comes close to this yet. The only negative is the short record times. With a 2gb card, I get ~15 minutes in chunks of 7.5. I dont know why, but its limited to 1gb chunks. Newer cams have mepg4 that get you over an hour of video, but not the combination of zoom and stills, good still quality and stereo record.

cybrosh · Oct 24, 2005, 10:36 AM

I was afraid someone would mention the S2 :P

Basically, I'm looking for 640, 30 FPS(possible 3mbits?), the o.zoom should be usable during movie recording. I don't mind the stills taking in movie, but it's seems to be popular now. MPEG would be nicer than most of the Jpeg-M(avi).

Of course you'd have to combine this with a serious stills cam, and voila! Maybe I'm asking too much, but I'm not looking for a camcorder. I want short clips of sports, Macro's, landscape and nature pics.

A friend's S1 really did great job with the videos.

I was thinking of the Sanyo C5 for fun! since I already own a nice digicam, but then I thought on moving up, and get the Fuji S9000 or the Pana' FZ30. Both can handle the videos pretty well, and both are ultra zoomed cameras, close to DSLR, but they have their differences.

If you have anything else to suggest, I'd really appreciate it!

tclune · Oct 24, 2005, 10:41 AM

I think that VATechTigger's post points to the real problem of using a stillcamera for video: there's just not enough storage to make it useful in typical situations. To my mind, video will be useful when you can take a two-week vacation and not worry about your storage medium. With a digital camcorder, you can -- furthermore, you can add still pictures into the mix and still feel like you can finish your vacation before your camera does. The quality of still images may be less than you would like, but the trip is doable.

You can't say the same thing with a still camera saving video. It will be seriously limited, no matter how large your storage card is. Video requires tape or an equivalent storage medium. It's as simple as that. It's a much more usable compromise, practically speaking, to add mediocre stills to a video cam than to add medicre movies to a still camera.

cybrosh · Oct 24, 2005, 10:45 AM

TC I agree with you completely.

However, in my case, I need to record short clips of sports(mostly)which range from 15 to 40 seconds max'. So I'm not really worried about the storage, as I plan to use 3GB, and that's more than enough.

I also don't need the quality of a camcorder but would like to get close :roll:

Like many before me said, and to quote the both of you

if you want movies, get a camcorder.

VAtechtigger · Oct 24, 2005, 1:46 PM

well, I guess its just not clear what you want still. You are all over the place, from the sanyo C5 (the C6 was jsut anounced due in Nov) to the Fuji S9000. None of the Mpeg4 video cams will come close to the quality of video you get from a MiniDV cam. While the Mjpeg do hold less video than Mpeg4, they do not need to be uncompressed to edit them, so the quality remains stronger if you plan on editing. If you just want to cut and paste into DVD's. then you should be fine.

So what do you have against the S2 then? it does short clips no prob, in excellent quality with all the features you seem to need. Plus its a bit more portable than the FZ30 and S9000, which are getting DSLR sized.

Caelum · Oct 24, 2005, 3:06 PM

When you consider the S2's movie storage requirements, it hardly makes it a practical video camera. Strpyw posted in the sanyo forum that he apparently got both the C5 and S2 and decided to keep the C5. Perhaps you could communicate with him/her to get more details on their decision, but I suspect it's the recording time.

Oh,check out this super cute video of a chipmunkby Sanyo, taken with the C4 (not the C5). Also found a cute kitty taken with the C5, notby Sanyo. Sorry, not sports or landscapes, it falls under nature, cute nature that is. :G

VAtechtigger · Oct 24, 2005, 3:17 PM

Quote:

However, in my case, I need to record short clips of sports(mostly)which range from 15 to 40 seconds max'

Not a problem then. The zoom and image qualty make up for the difference over the Sanyos. If I need an hour long video, its something that I want high quality and I use my MiniDV. There is just to much of a comprimise right now. There are no jack of all trades. I would take a Sanyo snowboarding though. I currently take my SD300 snowboarding and film runs of the slopes with it. It holds up suprisingly well and has taken many a fall in the powder. Its a bit akward to hold with one hand and film sideays with giong down the slopes. The C5/C6 might be cool for this, so I have looked into it.

cybrosh · Oct 24, 2005, 3:22 PM

Caelum,

Movies are wicked! you could hear the zoom with the kitty...but the quality is amazing, in my opinion, anyways.

VA - I wish I knew what I wanted, I'd love to get my hands on the C5. C6 is new and was just announced, and it would take some time to get here. I don't wish to wait. The absurd is, I can get the FZ30, S9000/9500 and C5 at the same price!!!!!

The C5 is compact, and cool. But again, I want something more serious for stills. Bloody he**, Caelum, knows how I feel - decisions, decisions!!!!!

Cheers,

Cy'.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Oct 21, 2005, 8:01 PM	#1
cybrosh Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 22	Let's do it differently. What stills camera would you recommend that also has great video capabilities? Cheers!

Oct 23, 2005, 10:00 PM	#2
Rambler358 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Torrance, CA Posts: 181	You might want to define what you mean by "great video capabilities", as quite a few digital cameras come with the ability to shoot video at 640x480 at 30fps. Did you need more than that? If so, the choices narrow down considerably. But if your first direction is video and you need to take the occassional still, then you may want to look at digital video cams instead.

Oct 24, 2005, 9:53 AM	#3
VAtechtigger Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 570	The canon S2 has about the best video capability of any Still camera. 640x480 at 30fps, full optical zoom during movie, and you can snap pics as well during video record at full resolution, stereo sound. Nobody comes close to this yet. The only negative is the short record times. With a 2gb card, I get ~15 minutes in chunks of 7.5. I dont know why, but its limited to 1gb chunks. Newer cams have mepg4 that get you over an hour of video, but not the combination of zoom and stills, good still quality and stereo record.

Oct 24, 2005, 10:36 AM	#4
cybrosh Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 22	I was afraid someone would mention the S2 :P Basically, I'm looking for 640, 30 FPS(possible 3mbits?), the o.zoom should be usable during movie recording. I don't mind the stills taking in movie, but it's seems to be popular now. MPEG would be nicer than most of the Jpeg-M(avi). Of course you'd have to combine this with a serious stills cam, and voila! Maybe I'm asking too much, but I'm not looking for a camcorder. I want short clips of sports, Macro's, landscape and nature pics. A friend's S1 really did great job with the videos. I was thinking of the Sanyo C5 for fun! since I already own a nice digicam, but then I thought on moving up, and get the Fuji S9000 or the Pana' FZ30. Both can handle the videos pretty well, and both are ultra zoomed cameras, close to DSLR, but they have their differences. If you have anything else to suggest, I'd really appreciate it!

Oct 24, 2005, 10:41 AM	#5
tclune Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,093	I think that VATechTigger's post points to the real problem of using a stillcamera for video: there's just not enough storage to make it useful in typical situations. To my mind, video will be useful when you can take a two-week vacation and not worry about your storage medium. With a digital camcorder, you can -- furthermore, you can add still pictures into the mix and still feel like you can finish your vacation before your camera does. The quality of still images may be less than you would like, but the trip is doable. You can't say the same thing with a still camera saving video. It will be seriously limited, no matter how large your storage card is. Video requires tape or an equivalent storage medium. It's as simple as that. It's a much more usable compromise, practically speaking, to add mediocre stills to a video cam than to add medicre movies to a still camera.

Oct 24, 2005, 10:45 AM	#6
cybrosh Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 22	TC I agree with you completely. However, in my case, I need to record short clips of sports(mostly)which range from 15 to 40 seconds max'. So I'm not really worried about the storage, as I plan to use 3GB, and that's more than enough. I also don't need the quality of a camcorder but would like to get close :roll: Like many before me said, and to quote the both of you if you want movies, get a camcorder.

Oct 24, 2005, 1:46 PM	#7
VAtechtigger Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 570	well, I guess its just not clear what you want still. You are all over the place, from the sanyo C5 (the C6 was jsut anounced due in Nov) to the Fuji S9000. None of the Mpeg4 video cams will come close to the quality of video you get from a MiniDV cam. While the Mjpeg do hold less video than Mpeg4, they do not need to be uncompressed to edit them, so the quality remains stronger if you plan on editing. If you just want to cut and paste into DVD's. then you should be fine. So what do you have against the S2 then? it does short clips no prob, in excellent quality with all the features you seem to need. Plus its a bit more portable than the FZ30 and S9000, which are getting DSLR sized.

Oct 24, 2005, 3:06 PM	#8
Caelum Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 1,030	When you consider the S2's movie storage requirements, it hardly makes it a practical video camera. Strpyw posted in the sanyo forum that he apparently got both the C5 and S2 and decided to keep the C5. Perhaps you could communicate with him/her to get more details on their decision, but I suspect it's the recording time. Oh,check out this super cute video of a chipmunkby Sanyo, taken with the C4 (not the C5). Also found a cute kitty taken with the C5, notby Sanyo. Sorry, not sports or landscapes, it falls under nature, cute nature that is. :G

Oct 24, 2005, 3:22 PM	#10
cybrosh Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 22	Caelum, Movies are wicked! you could hear the zoom with the kitty...but the quality is amazing, in my opinion, anyways. VA - I wish I knew what I wanted, I'd love to get my hands on the C5. C6 is new and was just announced, and it would take some time to get here. I don't wish to wait. The absurd is, I can get the FZ30, S9000/9500 and C5 at the same price!!!!! The C5 is compact, and cool. But again, I want something more serious for stills. Bloody he**, Caelum, knows how I feel - decisions, decisions!!!!! Cheers, Cy'.